you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]d3rr 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

what was represented as a new law by the US Congress was, in fact, merely a definition given by the EUMC

I think I see your point. This definition does not directly apply to Americans (yet!). I guess it's not a good idea to try to memeify laws.

[–]Tom_Bombadil 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Yet..

Why should US laws apply to foreigners?

[–]d3rr 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

It shouldn't, and this whole law shouldn't exist because it is racist.

[–]Tom_Bombadil 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Fact.

[–]wizzwizz4[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I guess it's not a good idea to try to memeify laws.

I think this was more than that, though. The screenshot was deliberately edited to make it seem like that was a top-level part of the law; it wasn't just cropped.

It seems like that thing that… I can't remember who said it or what it was called, but that thing where you fill a community with fake undesirables and then criticise it for being full of undesirables. The thing is, we currently don't have the slightest defence against something like that happening, and I want us to be able to hold that off at least until the decentralisation happens.

[–]d3rr 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yeah critical context was omitted. One thing to keep in mind here is that this is a famous redditor who generally only posts A+++ material, so a huge upvote bias doesn't surprise me.